reza elhami; حجت Velaeirad
Abstract
Belief, along with religious and non-religious duties, are among the most important issues addressed by Sharia (Islamic law). It may be claimed that strong arguments can be put forward for the necessity of believing in the principles of religion. This article seeks to provide an answer to the question ...
Read More
Belief, along with religious and non-religious duties, are among the most important issues addressed by Sharia (Islamic law). It may be claimed that strong arguments can be put forward for the necessity of believing in the principles of religion. This article seeks to provide an answer to the question raised with regard to the validity of certainty as follows: If somebody adopts a false belief through the recognition of his own intellect, or on the contrary, if somebody, through rational reasoning, denies a belief stablished in a religious community, how can the possibility of his worldly and hereafter punishment be justified based on rational reasoning? By examining the rational arguments and the jurists’ injunctions, we find out that since the validity of a decision is inherent, a person who is firm on a theory and performs actions accordingly, or abandons real and self-evident duties, it is impossible to make the actions obligatory contrary to his decision. Also, it can be concluded that although, in practice, it is possible to force him to show commitment or pretend to do so against his will, it is not possible for him to change his belief. Therefore, if his ignorance was his fault, he will be punished for his fault not for acting according to his belief.
